I don't know a damned thing about gambling but these things get posted from time to time whether it's for teams or players or whatever. It seems to me that the sweet spot is somewhere between 8-1 and 15-1 as far as being "good bets" regardless of what the subject is. I don't know if that holds true for gamblers but I find myself drawn to that range whenever I read a piece like this.

Lee Smith 20/1
Tim Raines 50/1

That just makes me sad

I don't know a damned thing about gambling but these things get posted from time to time whether it's for teams or players or whatever. It seems to me that the sweet spot is somewhere between 8-1 and 15-1 as far as being "good bets" regardless of what the subject is. I don't know if that holds true for gamblers but I find myself drawn to that range whenever I read a piece like this.

in horse racing there is a sweet spot on the Return On INvestment line that corresponds to the number of horses in the field. I.e. in a 7 horse field there is a slight peak for a 7:1 horse. Mind you, in all horse betting there is a negative ROI due to the house take. However on the whole it gets minimized with a 7;1 in a 7 horse field. So the ROI might be 95% on average. Still losing in the long haul, but pretty good by horse player standards.

What's the maximum number of voters? There were 543 ballots submitted in 2008, 539 ballots in both 2009 and 2010, 581 ballots in 2011, and 573 last year. On an atypical ballot amid atypical pissed-offness, with writers voting against other writers as much as they're voting for players, I have the feeling that Jack Morris can't fully rely on the traditional "let's get 'im over the hump, boys!" momentum and bonhomie.

But I also have the concurrent feeling that Morris' chances would improve if there's a decent amount of irregular old school voters who might be roused from their crypts to rise up against the monsters Barry and Roger. Morris needs 50 extra votes based on the 2011-12 ballot count. If 25 guys who haven't voted much lately react to the angry hubbub and turn out, I'm speculating that they'd likely be a good fit for his constituency.

Morris might be the worst candidate on that list -- he seems a bit worse than Lee Smith who looks like the 2nd worst.

My answer from the other thread:

Let's see... McGwire has gotten 20-25% of the vote. Palmeiro has gotten 10-15%.

I've got the following predictions:

Clemens 45-55%
Bonds 45-55%
Bagwell 45-55%
Piazza 65-75%
Sosa 20-30%
Morris... In!!

Jack Morris 1/5
...
Barry Bonds 40/1
Roger Clemens 40/1

Lol.

Tell me again how the HOF isn't turning into a joke?

Lol.

Tell me again how the HOF isn't turning into a joke?

The only way to make smart bets is to be as objective as possible. Emotion has no place in successful gambling.

Fade Palmeiro at that number. His odds are way longer than 500-1.

Bagwell 45-55%
Piazza 65-75%

Not sure why Piazza would do better in his 1st year on the ballot than Bagwell in his 2nd. Bagwell received 56% of the vote last year, and should get an increase from those voters who couldn't see him as 1st Ballot material. On the PED issue, there is no real evidence on either, but Piazza has the burden of backne, FWIW, so how do the anti-PED absolutists vote against Bagwell but for Piazza?

The only way to make smart bets is to be as objective as possible. Emotion has no place in successful gambling.

That's the point: those are the smart bets, hence why the HoF is turning into a joke.

Here's the difference between Morris and Clemens.

B-R converts their stats to a neutral environment with a run environment of 4.42 r/g.

In that environment Clemens converts to 4888 innings at a 3.10 ERA (1683 ER).

Morris converts to 3814 innings of a 4.28 ERA (1815 ER).

If we have Clemens pitch the first 3814 innings of his career at Morris's rate, in order to then start to bring Clemens's final numbers down towards Morris's level Clemens would have to pitch the remaining 1,074 innings of his career without giving up an earned run. So, essentially, 119 shutouts in a row.

But wait - that still doesn't bring him close to Morris's level, because Morris will _still_ have allowed 132 more runs at that point.

Ladies and Gentleman, the odds for what the BBWAA, armed with this information, is going to do:

Jack Morris 1/5
...
Roger Clemens 40/1

The HOF is about to fast become irrelevant.

The HOF is about to fast become irrelevant.

As much as I agree with you on steroids and HOF admission I think irrelevant is too strong. I think the next few years will be an aberration, a blip, that stains the HOF, damages it even, but does not destroy it.

Now the inductions without Bonds, et al will be greatly diminished but not irrelevant because it still holds a place in America's Baseball consciousness. Though if they admit Morris and only Morris, then yeah this year's induction is irrelevant and a travesty.

Oh well.

The HOF's been dead to me since it spent years and years hosing Ron Santo, so this odds list just gives me a further sense of vindication. I know who the best players I've ever seen are, and I don't need a bunch of sportswriter hacks or crotchety former baseball players to validate my views for me.

There's no way that Morris is actually overwhelmingly likely to make the Hall this year, is there? He only got 66.7% of the vote last year on a very weak ballot. My sense is that most of the militant anti-PED voters were already Morris supporters, so he doesn't seem to have a lot to gain from the ballot being stacked with 'roiders. It would be one thing if he were obviously the best clean candidate, but he isn't. And there's a pretty sizable number of more-statheady writers who will never vote for him. I guess I'm waiting for Chris Jaffe to weigh in with his predictions, which are truly authoritative, but I strongly suspect he wouldn't give Morris such good odds.

Not sure why Piazza would do better in his 1st year on the ballot than Bagwell in his 2nd. Bagwell received 56% of the vote last year, and should get an increase from those voters who couldn't see him as 1st Ballot material. On the PED issue, there is no real evidence on either, but Piazza has the burden of backne, FWIW, so how do the anti-PED absolutists vote against Bagwell but for Piazza?

This is Bagwell's third year. He jumped from 41 percent to 56 percent between Year 1 and 2. I have no idea what to expect this year with him (or most anyone, for that matter, but I wouldn't be surprised by a big dip or a big climb in his case).

I think the listed odds are high for everyone but Biggio. Morris was way too many votes away in last year's election to be at 1:5, and most of those guys at the bottom have absolutely no chance to be elected this year.

Joke though the HOF is, is Morris *really* the only guy more likely than not to be selected this year, even granting all the "OMG TEH STERIODS" discounts that'll be applied to Bonds, Clemens, etc.? Biggio and Piazza are less than even money? Really?

There's no way that Morris is actually overwhelmingly likely to make the Hall this year, is there?

Morris is on 7 of the 10 full ballots so far.

Joke though the HOF is, is Morris *really* the only guy more likely than not to be selected this year, even granting all the "OMG TEH STERIODS" discounts that'll be applied to Bonds, Clemens, etc.? Biggio and Piazza are less than even money? Really?

I'd put Morris and Biggio at around even money, the rest below. Piazza and Bagwell are the only other candidates who can make a push, but I'd be surprised if either of them get there.

The HOF is about to fast become irrelevant.

In the eyes of a small rump of revisionists. You're projecting.

Though if they admit Morris and only Morris, then yeah this year's induction is irrelevant and a travesty.

But a nice statement about the 80s nonetheless. What do you think his induction song should be? "Come on Eileen," "Panama," "Take on Me," or how about "Let's Go Crazy," the #1 song in the land when he toyed with the Padres in Game 4 of the 1984 World Series?

-I think Morris is more likely than not to get inducted, but if you gave me 4-to-1 odds on Morris missing out, I'd lay a bet down.

-Bagwell at 45-55% is way low for a projection. He was 56% last year, up from 42% his first time, and I'll be surprised if he loses votes. I'd guess Bagwell gets to 60-65%.

Not sure why Piazza would do better in his 1st year on the ballot than Bagwell in his 2nd.

To an uninformed voter, Bagwell's Hall of Fame case is entirely non-obvious. He has few milestones, and a big chunk of his value is tied up in walks, park effects, non-HR power, baserunning, and defense. I expect quite a few of the voters who didn't pick Bagwell in his first year did so because they had no idea how great he was.

That won't happen with Piazza. To anyone who paid attention to baseball in the last two decades or glances at a stat page tomorrow, Piazza is a Hall of Famer on the merits. I figure Piazza should lose most of the voters who won't choose Bagwell on spurious PED grounds, but he should get most all of Bagwell's current voters. I'd guess 60-70% for Piazza, and 80% wouldn't surprise me in the least.

The HOF is about to fast become irrelevant.

In the eyes of a small rump of revisionists. You're projecting.

Unusual as it may be, SBB is right. Most people don't want Bonds, Clemens, and co. in the HOF. Pete Rose's omission gets the HOF a lot of attention and only diminishes it relevancy in the eyes of a small number of people. I imagine the stuff with Bonds and Clemens will work out more or less the same way, with the difference being that I expect the 'roiders to get in in the not so distant future.

As far as this vote hurting the HOF's credibility in the stat world, I don't think many of us had a ton of respect for them to begin with.

Most people don't want Bonds, Clemens, and co. in the HOF.

Has there been polling on this? My intuition is that it's wrong. It seems likely that a small majority of BBWAA voters don't want them in, but I'm skeptical it's a majority of fans.

I'm guessing that with every year that Bonds and Clemens aren't inducted, more and more people will realize they ought to be in the Hall. I'm thinking of something like a five year process. But of course I'm making that up entirely.

What do you think [Jack Morris'] induction song should be? ...how about "Let's Go Crazy," the #1 song in the land when he toyed with the Padres in Game 4 of the 1984 World Series?

If you're going to pick a Prince song, it should be "7," because that's pretty much Morris' HoF case.

Mark McGwire 500/1
Rafael Palmeiro 500/1.

So, you're telling me there's a chance. Yeah!

-Bagwell at 45-55% is way low for a projection. He was 56% last year, up from 42% his first time, and I'll be surprised if he loses votes. I'd guess Bagwell gets to 60-65%.

But you're viewing him in isolation, as if he's a normal candidate in a normal year, steroids "tainted" though he may be. But I think this is wrong, and he's going to get swept up in the deluge of the other steroids players, and the analysis will be, "Ok, he's probably a HOFer, but he probably used steroids." IOW I think the increase he'd have gotten in a normal year is offset by the decrease he'll get due to being One Of The Steroids Players On The Ballot.

IOW I think the increase he'd have gotten in a normal year is offset by the decrease he'll get due to being One Of The Steroids Players On The Ballot.

This is obviously all speculative, but I think the effect will go the other way.

We're already seeing a trend of writers recognizing that the full PED ban is untenable. I think there will be some previous non-Bagwell voters who cast a ballot for Bonds or Clemens, and it will be harder for them to hold to a stand against Bagwell.

The other issue, with Bagwell, is that his voting history is wholly dissimilar from the steroids guys. McGwire has seen no movement, while Bagwell had a second-year surge reminiscent of Barry Larkin and Ryne Sandberg. I think a lot of people who haven't voted for Bagwell aren't doing so because of 'roids, but because they still haven't figured out what a great player Bagwell was. His stats are underwhelming at face value - you have to know a bit about baseball and do a bit of work to recognize Bagwell as the slam-dunk HoFer that he is. I think we'll see some more of that, too.

Unusual as it may be, SBB is right. Most people don't want Bonds, Clemens, and co. in the HOF. Pete Rose's omission gets the HOF a lot of attention and only diminishes it relevancy in the eyes of a small number of people. I imagine the stuff with Bonds and Clemens will work out more or less the same way, with the difference being that I expect the 'roiders to get in in the not so distant future.

As far as this vote hurting the HOF's credibility in the stat world, I don't think many of us had a ton of respect for them to begin with.

People probably do want Biggio/Piazza/Bagwell in the HoF, though. And they certainly want to see some enshrinees who have played ball since the strike.

The HOF's been dead to me since it spent years and years hosing Ron Santo, so this odds list just gives me a further sense of vindication. I know who the best players I've ever seen are, and I don't need a bunch of sportswriter hacks or crotchety former baseball players to validate my views for me.

I agree with the above quote, and I thought that it was worth repeating.

DB

I ain't predicting nuthin'

Well, not much.

I think Biggio goes in and Morris misses out but both will be close.

That's about the end of my predictions.

Sans steroid backlash, this would be a bad year for almost everybody on the ballot as Bonds and Clemens would be near-unanimous and you'd have Biggio and Morris (and maybe others) vying for a 3rd induction spot and both probably getting at least 65-70%. That would be bad news for Bagwell, Raines and the others.

But Bonds and Clemens aren't gonna be anywhere near unanimous and probably lucky to hit 50%. That makes this a deep but weak ballot and Morris and Bagwell (and maybe others) will likely continue to advance a bit.

Where’s my bloody Cortexiphan?! I need an alternate universe!

Hey, I just started watching this show!

I don't proclaim to know for sure whether or not Morris will make it this year, but the listed odds are way too high. If there were a way to bet against those odds, I certainly would.

I hope Bagwell goes in and confesses to using steroids in his acceptance speech.

I hope Bagwell goes in and confesses to using steroids in his acceptance speech.

As much as I don't think he belongs, and thus, don't want him in, I'd rather this was Jack Morris instead of Bagwell.

We are talking about ability to play major league baseball, are we not? All ye Puritans?

What exactly is the argument against Barry Bonds? He hurt the game? He cheated? He did not have top 5 natural ability all-time?

Please. It was a disgrace that baseball froze him out at the end of his career.

And now you have my opinion on the matter.

Absolutely everything is playing out just as i predicted.

If Schilling were on the ballot last year he would get talked up a hell of a lot more. Now he's like the third or fourth most talked about story.

Morris goes in alone. Biggio barely misses cause his name begins with B and he played with Bagwell.

What do you think his induction song should be?

Safety Dance.

these guys are all gonna be hall of famers at some point. if you go back to the election 50 years ago, 19 out of the top 21 vote-getters are now in the hall of fame. if you go back 40 years, it's 14 out of the top 17. if you go back 30 years it's 12/13. go back 20 years and it's 6/7. 10 years and it's 7/9.


i mean, seriously, the last few elections have seen the elections of andre dawson, jim rice, goose goosage and bruce sutter. these aren't exactly inner-circle types of guys, and yet, they're in. maybe jack morris gets added to that list this year, or maybe he doesn't, but at some point, he too is getting in the hall of fame - if not this year, then next. and if not next, well, if recent history holds i'm sure his family will enjoy his election the year after he passes away.


i guess these circumstances are somewhat different, but just by the numbers, on last year's ballot, there were 4 guys who were unelected, but who were above the threshold by measure of bill james' hall of fame monitor and hall of fame standards. those guys -- jeff bagwell, edgar martinez, larry walker, and rafael palmeiro -- would have been surefire selections without being tainted by the era.

but since they haven't gotten in, they're still on the ballot, and because of that, there's quite a logjam beginning to pile up. this year, you're adding bonds, clemens, piazza, biggio, and sosa to that queue. and the next year, you add maddux, thomas, mussina, glavine, and kent. the year after, you add johnson, sheffield, and martinez.


and the thing is, these aren't just guys who were good. these are guys who should be statistical no-brainers (well, for the most part). and even in the rosiest scenario, where you get 2 of these guys in each year (say bagwell and biggio this year, piazza and maddux the next, and thomas and johnson the year after that, then you still have a ballot that has edgar martinez, larry walker, rafael palmeiro, barry bonds, roger clemens, sammy sosa, mike mussina, tom glavine, jeff kent, gary sheffield, and pedro martinez. that's 11 guys right there, on a ballot with a max of 10 votes. and there's depth behind these guys, too.

forget whether jack morris gets in or not, if they can't get some of these guys in on the first ballot, this ballot's gonna get real ugly, real quick.

Here's the difference between Morris and Clemens.

NO RAY ITS A TRAP DON'T

Questions:

1) What are the odds that nobody makes it this year? I think they're pretty high. We should not assume that Morris going to get the 8.5% he needs to go over the top.

2) If steroids were a non-issue, wouldn't this be the most awesome induction ceremony ever? Clemens, Sosa, Bonds, Biggio, and Piazza would be cruising in. Palmeiro would already be in, and McGwire probably would be, too. Schilling wouldn't get in this year, but he'd be teed up for a couple years from now. But the Clemens/Sosa/Bonds/Biggio/Piazza would be the greatest HOF class of our lifetimes, right?

3) Who will not get 5%? Does Bernie Williams get the boot? Does Dale Murphy get the boot? How about Don Mattingly? Mattingly got 17.6% of the vote last year. He's clearly not going in (nor should he) - if you are putting 10 people on your ballot, you're probably booting out a few people to whom you gave votes last year. It strikes me that Williams, Murphy, and Mattingly are the three most likely "victims" of this logjam.

It strikes me that Williams, Murphy, and Mattingly are the three most likely "victims" of this logjam.

Murphy's in year 15.

The most likely guy to not get 5%? My money's on Sosa. As much as I love Sammy, and I think he belongs, that would be a nice result. Guy with over 600 HR is one and done because people suspect he took a substance that wasn't banned at the time.

Thanks for the reminder on Murphy. There are probably about 1 in 10 voters who have been voting for Murphy every year for the last 10 or 15 years. He's clearly not getting another 60% of the vote this year above his "base". Isn't a vote for Murphy truly the ultimate "wasted" vote this year?

3) Who will not get 5%? Does Bernie Williams get the boot? Does Dale Murphy get the boot? How about Don Mattingly? Mattingly got 17.6% of the vote last year. He's clearly not going in (nor should he) - if you are putting 10 people on your ballot, you're probably booting out a few people to whom you gave votes last year. It strikes me that Williams, Murphy, and Mattingly are the three most likely "victims" of this logjam.

Oh yeah, the 5% rule is gonna be "on steroids" the next few elections, slicing and icing hall-of-fame quality players every year.

I ran a little survey on another site and we came up with this top ten list of players who should still be on the ballot (retired since 1993):

Lou Whitaker
Will Clark
Kevin Brown
Albert Belle
Dave Stieb
David Cone
Bret Saberhagen
Harold Baines
John Franco
John Olerud

As for Murphy, he'll be a "victim" of the 15-year limit (as was mentioned).

Has there been polling on this? My intuition is that it's wrong. It seems likely that a small majority of BBWAA voters don't want them in, but I'm skeptical it's a majority of fans.

I would say the black guy on that list(Bonds) a majority of the fans want to keep out. The good old white boy(Clemens) would probably do less than 50% keep him out of the hall due to him having a large support from three (two and a half at least) baseball markets. I ultimately agree with you that it's the writers who are making this a story more than the casual fans though. I just don't see that many people who care, and from my experience, the ones who do care and aren't serious baseball fans, are Pete Rose in the hof supporters.

1) What are the odds that nobody makes it this year? I think they're pretty high. We should not assume that Morris going to get the 8.5% he needs to go over the top.

This is the advantage of the hof not publishing the ballots, if no one makes the cut, whoever is closest will magically get knocked up to the barely over line. In this economy, there is no way that the hof will go a year without putting some living player into the hof.

This is the advantage of the hof not publishing the ballots, if no one makes the cut, whoever is closest will magically get knocked up to the barely over line. In this economy, there is no way that the hof will go a year without putting some living player into the hof.

I don't mean to be critical, but do others on this thread believe this? I mean, I've never thought of it, but it is obviously possible. I mean, if the HOF took a goy who earned 15% of the vote, and said they got 75.8% or something, enough BBWAA voters would say they didn't vote for him that it would be fishy. But if Morris is at 73.2%, nobody would intuitively know. Also, I've been to induction ceremonies many times, and I've been to Cooperstown many other times during various points of the year (I went to college close by, and we'd sometimes get in the car on a whim and just go for an afternoon in February or something).

Let me say: If you've only been to Cooperstown on Induction Weekend, know that it is a completely different experience almost any other times of year. And if you go outside of the summer, it is a virtual ghost town for tourists - a pretty ghost town, a very pleasant ghost town, but there's nobody there. I think Induction Weekend is a really big deal to the local tourist economy, and if nobody gets in, that's a big deal. In fact, I would argue only Morris getting in would be pretty negative for the Hall's tourist concerns.

All that said - I believe 100% there is no funny business with ballots going on. How ironic would it be that the voters' desire to punish obvious first-ballot HOFers like Clemens and Bonds for cheating would cause those in charge of the process to cheat on the voting results...

Who will not get 5%?

If Palmeiro does at all (and I suspect he won't), I don't think it'll be by much.

The Hall's on record as approving of the voters' evaluations per the critiria, which calls for a lot of personal judgement. and which the voters have been applying vis-a-vis possible roid usage.. Evidently, the Hall itself doesn't want it stocked with a player later found to be a roider which has been the voters' judgement thus far. Should be fine with one guy getting in. One always seems to. Biggio or Morris...although neither would get my vote. Bagwell may well get in this year because it's 3 years and no evidence of roid use. At this point Bagwell should get in.

Eventually tho some player who's in the hall will be found to have juiced..then the floodgates should open. Bonds. et al.

What they should do is just stick a plaque on the entrance wall acknowledging the steroid era in general, and screw it (in).

Eventually tho some player who's in the hall will be found to have juiced..then the floodgates should open. Bonds. et al.

Not saying it can't happen, but that's a prediction that we've been hearing ever since the BALCO case broke. I somehow can't help but think that the wish is the father of the thought.

And who's going to spill the beans? Not any players who were actually there as first hand witnesses, if they haven't done so already. Certainly not an owner. A sportswriter who "knew"? Highly doubtful, unless he'd been diagnosed with a terminal disease. There seems to be this idea that "everyone knew" about steroid use, and perhaps that's true, but to date who's been ratted out by anyone other than Canseco?

Three other possibilities: A disgruntled wife or GF, a Greg Anderson slimeball who wants to cash in, or one of those Bornagain Christian conversions followed by a confession. I wouldn't bet the ranch on any of them.

Biggio or Morris...although neither would get my vote.

What's the case against Biggio? He had as good a career as anyone on the ballot not named Bonds or Clemens.